Author Rosa Montero talks to Ars about her new future-noir thriller.

Share this story

The year is 2109, and cloned humans—also known as replicants (or "reps")—are used for various jobs in The United States of Earth. Replicants look identical to humans except for their feline irises. Reps’ lives are short. They awake at age 25 and live for ten years, at which time disease strikes them down. Bruna Husky, a striking rep with close-cropped hair, incredible agility and strength, and tattoos to mark her status as a military replicant, discovers that other replicants have begun to attack. Bruna sets out to investigate the nature of these attacks and finds that the memories implanted in replicants' brains have been corrupted, causing the violent outbursts. In this oppressive environment, the ideas people build around their own memories are always in question.

Author Rosa Montero is a Spanish journalist who has written more than 26 books. Most of her works are not available in English, and Tears in Rain will be the first introduction for many readers. Montero talked to Ars from her home in Spain about the novel and its parallels to the real world as our biotechnologies and artificial intelligence efforts continue to progress.

"Phillip K. Dick’s Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheepand Ridley Scott’s Blade Runner film form part of the substrate of my novel," Montero said. "I read the book twenty years ago but the story in Tears of Rain is all its own. I explore the issues regarding replicants and artificial intelligence, both of which are luminous concepts.”

Indeed, it’s misguided to think about Tears in Rain as belonging to the previous book and film. It’s probably more accurate to say that Rosa Montero’s novel places a mirror in front of the ideas of Phillip K. Dick and Ridley Scott—it develops new ideas and questions about identity and memory, and it further explores the ways in which the reps are discriminated against. Montero accomplishes this by creating a charismatic heroine in Bruna, who sets out to investigate the film-noir environment of her futuristic society. Unlike the replicants and androids from many other works of fiction, Bruna is full of drive and passion. She’s a woman of action. Bruna also provides a much-needed female perspective to the book's ideas about what it would mean to be a cloned human with memories that aren’t real.

A technological war of the future

Tears in Rain and Amazon Crossing

This is the rich and detailed world in the new science fiction thriller Tears in Rain by award-winning author Rosa Montero. Tears in Rain has become available in the United States for the first time thanks to Amazon Crossing, a publishing imprint (and data tool) from Amazon that takes customer data, reviews, and feedback to identify books that merit translation for wider global audiences. The novel releases on November 27. The book and the audio version, read by Mary Robinette Kowal, are now available for pre-order.

Author Rosa Montero

One of the most engrossing elements of Tears in Rain is the detailed history of the world. Every few chapters, Montero treats the reader to passages of historical information that provide satisfying detail about how a world full of replicant servants came to be. Midway through the 21st century, the exploration of Mars and Saturn led to the development of androids who could be forced to mine colonies. Replicants used in this way became a success and were eventually repurposed for jobs on Earth, such as deep-sea-fish farming. Over time, some of the reps rose against their owners and started what became the Rep War. Montero fills the book with details of the treaties, laws, and wars that have shaped the world. We also learn many of the ways in which the biology of the replicants has been manipulated. At the center of these events are the totalitarian corporations and governments that put a stranglehold on citizens.

"My novel denounces totalitarianism," Montero told Ars. "Corruption is inherent to human life, but it doesn’t mean it has to be accepted by people."

The malleability of memory fuels the ways in which corrupt governments oppress their citizens. Bruna’s own memories may not be what she thinks they are. "Memory is truly an imaginary construct when you think about it," Montero said. "Even the way you and I remember earlier events, like birthdays and love affairs—they change over a lifetime. We are editing them all the time. [In the book] authoritarian and totalitarian regimes control when they manipulate this archive of information, when they take hold of the narrative... as they do with the reps’ memories."

Despite creating a bleak outlook on the misuse of information and technology, Montero says she appreciates the ways in which technology connects people around the globe. "Social media and technology are part of the Internet, and the Internet is a wonderful tool. At the same time, the problems we see with aggressive discourse, bullying, and mob mentality are awful. But the Internet is in its infancy, and things will change. And just like any other tool or technology, the Internet’s potential for good or bad depends on how it’s utilized."

Montero, who has spent a lifetime as a journalist and author, has an insatiable energy and curiosity for life. In some ways, she sees her android heroine as a manifestation of herself. "Bruna just appeared to me one day. I had no control over who she was. She’s a favorite of mine, and she has such a fierce [desire] to live. I feel so close to her. Sure, she may drink more than I do, but in many ways, we are similar."

Montero says she will be writing a sequel to Tears in Rain soon.

Promoted Comments

In regard to the people complaining that the setting is not original: How is this relevant to the quality of the book? In my opinion literature is(should be) judged according to how well it is implemented, not how clever the idea is.

The exception being crap genre fiction where the quality and style are the same boiler plate and so the only reason to read it is the world-building part. Personally I find wiki-articles to be more riveting than most genre fiction, though(hell, I'd rather read the WH40K wiki than any of the novels in that universe).

A Good Book(tm) generally has a totally bland and uninteresting setting and places in it an amazing story with amazing characters. It's not like The Road, or Moby Dick, or 100 Years of Solitude were great novels because of the world-building.

Would you refuse to read a non-SF, non-Fantasy, novel because "They totally copied their idea from reality?"

Share this story

Cesar Torres
Cesar is the Social Editor at Ars Technica. His areas of expertise are in online communities, human-computer interaction, usability, and e-reader technology. Cesar lives in New York City. Emailcesar.torres@arstechnica.com//Twitter@Urraca

Sounds less like "a nod" to Blade Runner and more "almost exactly the story from" Blade Runner. :\

Except it asks: "what if blade runners were replicants?" Woah dude, did I just ba-lowe your mind? pschew!

I'm not sure if you're being facetious or not, but you do know that Deckard (Harrison Ford) was a replicant in the movie? (Consult interviews with the director.) "You've done a man's job", etc.. It wasn't explicit but was intended to be subtly implied as part of the question of what makes us human, why some people are slaves, etc.. (Old film studies buff here. ... and yah, I agree with the rest of your comment. )

Edit: I just read the rest of the comments and realised that almost everybody already knows this. Sorry for being redundant redundant.Also edited to correct spelling.

I just had an idea for a book... Replicants with limited life spans are acting up due to corruption in their implanted memories. In a nod to the Blade Runner movie, I will call my book Edge Runner. (To be honest, if anyone from Asylum Pictures is interested, I'm selling the script for cheap.)

I see what you did there. Now I will write a book called "Razor Jogger" and it will be the best thing ever but totally unlike your material because my replicants will have corrupted implants but their memories will be fine. Eh? Eh?!

Next I will write an amazing book about "Bobbits" which are small human-like characters and an enchanted ankle bracelet that used to belong to Lord Boron. Any resemblance to that "other" fantasy world is strictly coincidental I assure you.

I just had an idea for a book... Replicants with limited life spans are acting up due to corruption in their implanted memories. In a nod to the Blade Runner movie, I will call my book Edge Runner. (To be honest, if anyone from Asylum Pictures is interested, I'm selling the script for cheap.)

I see what you did there. Now I will write a book called "Razor Jogger" and it will be the best thing ever but totally unlike your material because my replicants will have corrupted implants but their memories will be fine. Eh? Eh?!

Next I will write an amazing book about "Bobbits" which are small human-like characters and an enchanted ankle bracelet that used to belong to Lord Boron. Any resemblance to that "other" fantasy world is strictly coincidental I assure you.

Ok, you two seem to have the rough outline of an idea. Now go write a few hundred pages of engaging narrative and get it published.

In regard to the people complaining that the setting is not original: How is this relevant to the quality of the book? In my opinion literature is(should be) judged according to how well it is implemented, not how clever the idea is.

The exception being crap genre fiction where the quality and style are the same boiler plate and so the only reason to read it is the world-building part. Personally I find wiki-articles to be more riveting than most genre fiction, though(hell, I'd rather read the WH40K wiki than any of the novels in that universe).

A Good Book(tm) generally has a totally bland and uninteresting setting and places in it an amazing story with amazing characters. It's not like The Road, or Moby Dick, or 100 Years of Solitude were great novels because of the world-building.

Would you refuse to read a non-SF, non-Fantasy, novel because "They totally copied their idea from reality?"

Would you refuse to read a non-SF, non-Fantasy, novel because "They totally copied their idea from reality?"

Depends on the amount of copying. Copy too much and it just reads like "History." (Like as in a History TEXTBOOK)

I haven't read this book and I can't be 100% sure it was COMPLETELY copying but just from the DIRECTLY QUOTED AS TRUE information given... I'm inclined to believe it was "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep + Blade Runner + Add 2 cups hack writer + 1 teaspoon of shameless marketing" (and blend)

The fact they used such an iconic phrase in the title "Tears in Rain" from Ridley Scott's film... then used replicants. Even going so far as to tell you they are also known as "Reps." I mean come on. How far does it have to go? Does the hero need to be wearing a weather beaten trenchcoat, have an oversized revolver and a gruff bourbon soaked demeanor before you start to notice the stealing going on here?

Look, it's not that I think a good writer couldn't borrow from Blade Runner and write a good novel. The real issue here is... why would a good science fiction writer need to? It makes me skeptical of their skill as a storyteller. In the time it would take me to read that book I could have 5 or 6 outlines for books based on synthetic humans with fairly original plotlines. (Even if they might borrow a thing or two from my favorites, such as Do Androids Dream, Neuromancer and others.)

Replicants/clones working in mining colonies, living shortly and perishing due to diseases and becoming a problem...

Sounds too much like the Duncan Jones' "Moon" movie that features a replicant/clone, manning a mining operation on the Moon and getting terminally sick after a few years of service only to be replaced by an identical dude. Problems arise and the clones get to investigate while also seeking answers regarding their identity...

Yet the movie, that caused quite a stir just a few years ago, and that seems to have helped pitched the idea to the author doesn't get mentioned in the entire piece.

Without having read it yet, my view on this is that anyone who claims to write something based on a work of PKD has to really step up. Thus I have really high expectations and I'm not optimistic anyone could really impress. But I'm willing to give it a try, since opinions read up to now seem to be quite OK - some of which we have to take with a huge grain of salt since most of the readers of this piece have never read Do Androids Dream of.. or seen Blade Runner (which is already a simplification but fairly nicely done).

I do not get why people make such a fuss over the similarities. A copyright is not a patent on an idea. It should be possible for the book to have very similar plot lines, as long as the text is not the same.

Sounds less like "a nod" to Blade Runner and more "almost exactly the story from" Blade Runner. :\

Except it asks: "what if blade runners were replicants?" Woah dude, did I just ba-lowe your mind? pschew!

I'm not sure if you're being facetious or not, but you do know that Dekker (Harrison Ford) was a replicant in the movie? (Consult interviews with the director.) "You've done a man's job", etc.. It wasn't explicit but was intended to be subtly implied as part of the question of what makes us human, why some people are slaves, etc.. (Old film studies buff here. ... and yah, I agree with the rest of your comment. )

Edit: I just read the rest of the comments and realised that almost everybody already knows this. Sorry for being redundant redundant.

Wasn't aware of this, and was getting kind of confused since I was assuming people were talking about the book rather than the film (or talking about both). Interesting that they threw this into the film even though it wasn't in the book

Good to see someone finally denounce totalitarianism. We've been far too soft on it.

You are sarcastic, but I think that for a Spanish person of Ms. Montero's age the denunciation of totalitarianism is not mere lip service.

If it's more than "corporations are teh evilz and enslave teh sheeples" kind of drivel, I'll be very surprised. Where are the heirs of Asimov and Heinlein?

You tired of the same old BS too eh? When did scifi authors and script writers lose the ability to see beyond he evil mega corps ala Resident Evil. I miss real creativity in scifi scripts and mainstream books.

Best i can tell, even the people working on the movie is confused about it. Never mind that there are some 5 different edits out there, each making it more or less ambiguous what Deckard actually was.

I found the quote in a documentary about the film on YouTube. There was an intention to keep it subtle and ambiguous. Ridley or one of the writers talks about it all and admits to a direct question that Deck was a Replicant (I think he says "I thought it was obvious.") Anyhow, it's there to further the central question of what makes us human and why some "people" are considered less than human. It's also referenced subtly throughout the movie with little statements "Have you ever taken the test yourself?", "You've done a man's job.", and by Deck being shadowed by his creepy "keeper", Mr. Unicorn Man.P.K.Dick also liked considering questions about what gave us an identity, etc. and examined it in other novels including the one used as the basis for Total Recall, which wasn't considered in the pathetic movie version.Dick himself qualified as mildly paranoid schizophrenic which can call into question all sorts of aspects of our perception of reality. As a good writer he used "what he knew" in his work.

P.K.Dick also liked considering questions about what gave us an identity, etc. and examined it in other novels including the one used as the basis for Total Recall, which wasn't considered in the pathetic movie version.

P.K.Dick also liked considering questions about what gave us an identity, etc. and examined it in other novels including the one used as the basis for Total Recall, which wasn't considered in the pathetic movie version.

1990 or 2012?

I've only seen the old 1990 version, so that one. I'm curious about the new one. I'll see it some time.

Another little trivia tidbit from the movie: Edward James Olmos who played Gaff (Unicorn Man) improvised the funky patois he spoke in the movie. Also a very excellent actor to go along with Rutger Hauer, Ford, and a young Sean Young.

Montero used to be known more as a journalist than as a writer, especially for her interviews. That's my impression at least; I have read her often in the newspaper. She is well known in Spain.

She wrote a fantasy novel that had decent reviews, many years ago, but she's won prizes for mainstream fiction and she is not a genre writer. Now I haven't read this book and I don't know if it is any good. However I have generally liked what I've read of her and I think she can tell a story. (The cover is vulgar, but that's not her fault.)

For the people claiming plagiarism, I think that's extremely unlikely, because 1. she does have a reputation, and 2. Ursula Le Guin wouldn't have endorsed the novel in that case, as I believe she is a tad fastidious in those matters.

When Philip Kindred Dick died in 1982 at age 53, BTW just prior to 'blade Runner' being released and after having seen a few minutes of it, was very pleased that Rachel had been brought to life by another's hand. He was more than pleased at what he had seen, his writings from that time indicate he was ecstatic about it. Ridley Scott's musings in 'Dangerous Days' would seem definitive on this matter.

In light of PKD's age 30 years ago and his somewhat erratic health, I seriously doubt he would still be alive were he not to suffer the series of strokes that did indeed kill him. He was most welcoming and encouraging to other writers as Tim Powers can attest to, at the very least. I do believe that should there be Writer's Paradise where all good authors go to be published again and again to universal acclaim and just desserts, that PKD is indeed watching this vale of tears and is smiling down upon Rosa Montero and wishing her well.

Fiction is a collaborative art to a wider extent than many realize. All who write are influenced by what they have read, and this goes back as far as you will find the written word. How you deal with those influences and turn them into 'your' writing is much the same as in music. You listen to the Beatles and become inspired to do something with 'the rhythm of rhyming guitars' to quote Roxy Music. You hear Jimi Hendrix and become Stevie Ray Vaughn. Very little writing is truly original and/or springs from whole cloth.

The first work by PKD that I remember purchasing was 'Flow My Tears' form 1974 but I have indeed read all the major works and many of the posthumous works. I bought for a period of twenty years any and all books by PKD that I could find. Sadly many were lost in a flood and all I have of those are memories. I am happy that someone would find inspiration enough to write based on his works and themes with a clear acknowledgement of him contained in it. I do believe PKD would approve and most heartily so.

Sounds less like "a nod" to Blade Runner and more "almost exactly the story from" Blade Runner. :\

Except it asks: "what if blade runners were replicants?" Woah dude, did I just ba-lowe your mind? pschew!

That was the whole point of the Blade Runner Ultimate Directors Blu Ray cut. So no, you did not just blow my mind. Ford hated the idea that Deckard was a Replicant. But Scott insisted.

As for this book I am Sci-Fi/Cyberpunk/Dystopian Future junkie so I will read it. I don't care how close it is to some movie or book. I hope it is good.

Hell, The Matrix ripped off William Gibson so much it hurts my head to think about but nobody really cares about that. Wintermute says STFU.

EDIT: If the books is that good I can also see it being made into a movie at some point. Which would be fine with me as well. I can always use more Dark Dystopian Future movies with an intellectual bent.

In defense of Montero and as a writer myself, I must agree with many of the comments. Virtually every creative idea, be it song, or art, or story can be dissected to find threads from something that existed before. It's all in the execution. If everything had to be completely original we would have stopped with a wheel made of rock.

Why is this review published two weeks before the book's release date? I read the review, I made up my mind to buy it, only to be greeted on Amazon's page with the "pre-order now" button. There are hundreds of books being released everyday, so it's not such a big deal that a book will be released soon. Why couldn't this review wait two more weeks? Now, I will probably forget about this book in two weeks time. It's completely different to publish in-advance reviews of things like phones or tablets, because those are expensive things, there are relatively few of them, and they are a sort of purchase that requires some planning. But books? Please. Books are mostly impulsive purchases. So I think it is really non-sense to publish reviews weeks before their release.

P.K.Dick also liked considering questions about what gave us an identity, etc. and examined it in other novels including the one used as the basis for Total Recall, which wasn't considered in the pathetic movie version.

1990 or 2012?

I've only seen the old 1990 version, so that one. I'm curious about the new one. I'll see it some time.

IMO, "Blue Skies on Mars" was quite pointed about posing a "what is reality" question.Though I suppose YMMV.

[Without commenting on quality of the movie, or how faithful it was to source.]

If you take an extremely well known line from a movie/book and name your book that - and then use the same subject matter...

You either

a) Are doing fan fiction - as someone here mentioned

or

b) Are plagiarizing.. and announcing that you are plagiarizing doesn't "make it better" - it's tacky and implies you have no creativity.

The only exception I even have to these is if you are doing something extremely exotic - some type of mashup between various genre's and are just giving a nod to a given book/movie... but this doesn't strike me as a nod.

Would it be fine to you guys if I had a movie.. involving guys with lightsabers and blasters and it was named "The Force"?

That's the same thing happening here... and one of the favorite pieces - if not favorite piece - of Blade Runner in most people's minds is the line about "Tears in Rain"... so the other issue is you are riding on another's coat tails.. which is why we have copyright.

But hey, if you like it you like it - I just think it reflects negatively on the writer and I would turn my nose up immediately to such a novel... -- as I'm doing right now. Especially considering how much I love Blade Runner and Electric Sheep...